Proposed Roadside Services Comprising
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Stirling Council Agenda Item No. 4 Date of 4 August 2020 Planning & Regulation Panel Meeting: Not Exempt Proposed roadside services comprising Petrol Filling Station (sui generis), Truck Stop, Restaurants and Drive-thru (Class 3/sui generis), Amenity Building (Class 1 & 3 and ancillary uses), landscaping, access and ancillary works at Land Some 500 Metres South West Of Balhaldie Farm, Dunblane - GB Grove Ltd - 19/00243/PPP Purpose & Summary The application has been referred to the Planning & Regulation Panel by the Planning & Building Standards Manager in accordance with the Council’s scheme of delegation procedures since the application proposes a Major Development under the Town and Country Planning (Hierarchy of Developments) (Scotland) Regulations 2009 due to the size of the application site. This report forms the Report of Handling for the planning application in compliance with the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013. Recommendations Panel is asked to refuse the application for the following reasons: 1. the proposed development is contrary to Primary Policy 3: Provision of Infrastructure as the site is not identified as being land required for the provision of identified or anticipated infrastructure in either national, regional or local transport strategies or through the LDP DPMTAG Transport Appraisal; 2. the proposed development is contrary to Primary Policy 1: Placemaking of the Stirling Local Development Plan 2018 as it is not located to reduce the need to encroach onto a greenfield site and does not utilise vacant or under-used land and buildings within settlements. Nor does it safeguard or enhance the areas natural heritage; 3. the proposed development is contrary to Policies 2.6: Supporting Town Centres and 2.7: Retail and Footfall Generating Uses as the development is not located within an identified network centre; 4. the proposed development is contrary to Policy 2.9: Economic Development in the Countryside as it is not based on a recreational activity that requires a site specific need for a countryside location; 5. the proposed development is contrary to Primary Policy 4: Greenhouse Gas Reduction as the development is not in sustainable location and encourages reliance on the private car; 6. the proposed development is contrary to Primary Policy 10: Forestry, Woodlands and Trees as the development does not protect existing woodland and does not meet the criteria for removal set out in The Scottish Governments Control of Woodland Removal policy; and 7. the proposed development is contrary to Primary Policy 15: Tourism and Recreation Development and Policy 15.1: Tourism Development including Facilities and Accommodation as the development does not preserve or enhance the natural environment, does not promote responsible access to, interpretation of, and effective management and enhancement of the natural and historic environment, and cultural heritage and does not promote a wider spread of visitors. Resource Implications Not applicable. Legal & Risk Implications and Mitigation Not applicable. 1. Background 1.1. Not applicable. 2. Considerations The Site 2.1. The site is in a rural countryside location situated to the west of the A9 to the north of Stirling, close to the Council boundary with Perth and Kinross Council. The site, whilst rural, is not within an identified Green Belt in the Local Development Plan (LDP). The site is characterised as being mostly flat and has remnants of felled trees. In this regard the site is considered greenfield as there is no evidence of built development on the site. The Proposal 2.2. The proposal seeks consent to erect a roadside service station comprising of a Petrol Filling Station, 2x Drive-thru facilities, an amenity building, truck stop and associated landscaping at land to the south west of Balhadlie Farm, Dunblane. 2.3. This is an in principle application only so full details of the detailed design of the buildings are not yet available and consideration of precise design and materials will take place once a Matters Specified in Condition application is submitted, should this application be approved. Previous History 2.4. 18/00830/PPP – Proposed roadside services comprising petrol filling station (sui generis), truck stop, restaurants and drive –thru (Class 3/ Sui generis), amenity building (Class 1 & 3 and ancillary uses), hotel (Class 7) and leisure (Class 11), Landscaping, access and ancillary works - WITHDRAWN Consultations Perth & Kinross Council: 2.5. No comments to make on the proposals. Transport Scotland: 2.6. Noting the comments set out in their response, based on the information provided, Transport Scotland would offer no objection to application 19/00243/PPP subject to the listed conditions being applied to any consent awarded by the Council. Scottish Environment Protection Agency (East): 2.7. No objection to this planning application. Scottish Natural Heritage: 2.8. Do not intend to offer formal comment. Service Manager (Environmental Health): 2.9. No objection but suggest Air Quality Assessment, condition on land contamination, restriction on construction hours for noise and that mitigation of noise is to be undertaken in accordance with section 4 of the NA submitted, statement required for lighting. Roads Development Control: 2.10. No objection subject to conditions on parking provision, public transport and a travel plan. Planning & Policy (Archaeology): 2.11. No objection or mitigation proposed. However, suggests the inclusion of a "Negative Suspensive Condition - Programme of Archaeological Works (PAN 2/2011, SPP, SHEP) Bridge & Flood Maintenance: 2.12. No recorded flood history in this location and no information to suggest there is a significant problem. No objection to the development on grounds of flood risk. 2.13. This information is based on the accuracy and completeness of information supplied by the applicant or those working on their behalf. SEPA have a role to play as statutory consultee. Dunblane Community Council: 2.14. Objects to the application on the following grounds: 2.15. Principle: Erosion of rural countryside land and concern that it sets a precedent for further erosion. Cumulative impact of development alongside Proposal of Application Notice at Glasingall. Developer does not give a specific reason as to why this specific site is necessary to be developed. Lorry park is an industrial use and not suitable for a countryside location. Economic Impact Assessment shows that the site does not offer good employment prospects due to the nature of the jobs that will be created. Refute that the development of this type in this location will have a positive impact on Dunblane. The site does not attract visitors to Dunblane and Electric Vehicle (EV) charging facilities should be located there instead to encourage spend in the local area due to dwell time for recharging. Further, the reduction in scale of the development will not support dwell time for EVs and there is expected to be a limited lifespan for a Petrol Filling Station given wider policy changes, Transport Scotland response does not take into account Scottish Government Climate Change legislation. The site does not tie in to the Electric A9 proposals as it is not in a settlement which states that EV charging should be in communities to support local business. No Road services are permitted between Perth and Inverness and this should be the same for south of Perth also. Disappointed to note that the response from Transport Scotland does not make reference to the Electric A9 document. Specifically comment on and object to proposed conditions 6, 7 and 8. 2.16. Response: Please see the Assessment section below. 2.17. Transport and Access and Road Safety: Don’t consider regular bus services passing site to be suitable due to having to cross the carriageway to go south. There is a clear need to provide access for staff by bus/active travel routes. Current path alongside A9 is not suitable for cycling/walking. Strongly recommend that a new pedestrian/cycle route using current paths/tracks from Kinbuck is built. Concern about the increase in U-Turns that could take place for traffic heading south and increase in accidents. Increases in accidents in this area will negatively impact on Kinbuck as traffic diverts and the road system here is incapable of taking extra traffic. 2.18. Response: Please see the Assessment section below. 2.19. Environment and Visual Impact: Concerns over impact of additional lighting and seek restrictions to minimise the impact on light pollution. Concern over the impact of additional water run off that may lead to increased flood risk for communities along the Allan Water. Note that replanting is required by the felling licence issued by Forestry Commission Scotland. Do not expect planning permission will prevent compliance with other legal obligations by the developer and there is no reference to replanting in the application. Do not consider that the Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment takes into account new planting and new proposed buildings. 2.20. Response: Please see the Assessment section below. Representations 2.21. This application was subject to 2 formal periods of consultation as a result of changes to the original submitted plans. In total, comments were received from 21 interested parties. The comments raised can be summarised as follows: 2.22. Principle and scale of development: Inappropriate location for development. Scale and type of development is more appropriate for an edge of urban location, not a rural countryside. Speculative commercial opportunity proposal and no identified need for this type of development in this location. Similar facilities are provided nearby at Bannockburn interchange, new proposals at Craigforth and others nearby. Site was previously considered through the Stirling LDP 2014 and rejected at examination. There is no justification for the site when assessed against policies in the Stirling LDP 2018 and is not an allocated site for development. Development of the site will draw visitors and business away from network centres in the area, and there is concern of the economic impact on services further down on the A9.